Understanding Institutional Effectiveness What it is What it isn’t Why it’s important.

Slides:

Advertisements

Similar presentations

1 Mid-Term Review of The Illinois Commitment Assessment of Achievements, Challenges, and Stakeholder Opinions Illinois Board of Higher Education April.

Advertisements

What is District Wide Accreditation? Ensure Desired Results Improve Teaching & Learning Foster a Culture of Improvement A powerful systems approach to.

GPRA Government Performance and Results Act

David J. Sammons, Dean UF International Center. Southern Association of Colleges and Schools: SACS is our regional accrediting authority. The last SACS.

SEED – CT’s System for Educator and Evaluation and Development April 2013 Wethersfield Public Schools CONNECTICUT ADMINISTRATOR EVALUATION Overview of.

Assessing Student Learning Outcomes In the Context of SACS Re-accreditation Standards Presentation to the Dean’s Council September 2, 2004.

A Practical Guide. The Handbook Part I BCCC Vision of Assessment Guiding Principles of Assessment Part II The Assessment Model Part III A guide on how.

Institutional Effectiveness (ie) and Assessment

Surveys: One More Outcomes Measure Jay Shapiro, MD Program Director Anesthesiology.

Project Monitoring Evaluation and Assessment

An Assessment Primer Fall 2007 Click here to begin.

ASSESSMENT WORKSHOP: SESSION 1 ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPORT SERVICES ACADEMIC AND STUDENT SUPPORT SERVICES PRESENTED BY THE DIVISION OF INSTITUTIONAL EFFECTIVENESS.

EFQM Education Community of Practice Budapest, 08 May May 2003 Endre Hercz Executive Director - TQM Executive Director - TQM Westel Mobile Telecommunications.

1 GETTING STARTED WITH ASSESSMENT Barbara Pennipede Associate Director of Assessment Office of Planning, Assessment and Research Office of Planning, Assessment.

The Academic Assessment Process

PHAB's Approach to Internal and External Evaluation Jessica Kronstadt | Director of Research and Evaluation | November 18, 2014 APHA 2014 Annual Meeting.

The SACS Re-accreditation Process: Opportunities to Enhance Quality at Carolina Presentation to the Faculty Council September 3, 2004.

Northwest Commission on Colleges and Universities (NWCCU) Standard One Institutional Mission and Goals, Planning and Effectiveness Task Force Members Juanita.

Evaluation. Practical Evaluation Michael Quinn Patton.

Writing an Effective Assessment Plan

HELPFUL TIPS FOR UNIT PLANNING Office of Institutional Effectiveness.

2009 Student Satisfaction Survey. Survey Background Created to address the “Student Satisfaction” Performance Measures Developed and updated by the Student.

Community Sector Governance Capability Framework

Reaffirmation of Accreditation: Institutional Effectiveness Southern Association of Colleges and Schools February 2008 Stephen F. Austin State University.

Assessment Surveys July 22, 2004 Chancellor’s Meeting.

Graduate Program Review Where We Are, Where We Are Headed and Why Duane K. Larick, Associate Graduate Dean Presentation to Directors of Graduate Programs.

Session Goals: To redefine assessment as it relates to our University mission. To visit assessment plan/report templates and ensure understanding for.

Institutional Effectiveness & B-CU Dr. Helena Mariella-Walrond VP of Institutional Effectiveness Cory A. Potter Director of Assessment Administrative.

Departmental Assessment Process.  The institution identifies expected outcomes, assesses the extent to which it achieves these outcomes, and provides.

Institutional Effectiveness & B-CU Dr. Helena Mariella-Walrond VP of Institutional Effectiveness Cory A. Potter Director of Assessment Academic.

Creating Sustainable Organizations The Baldrige Performance Excellence Program Sherry Martin HIV Quality of Care Advisory Committee September 13, 2012.

Implementing and Auditing Ethics Programs

Focus on Learning: Student Outcomes Assessment and the Learning College.

JACKSON STATE UNIVERSITY ACADEMIC ASSESSMENT COMMITTEE WORKSHOP

MEASUREMENT TEAM MUSC Excellence. Measurement Team Co-chairs – Lynn Shull (CON) and Becki Trickey (CHP) Members –  Wally Bonaparte (President’s Office)

Addressing Six Critical Questions of Senior Administrators Addressing Six Critical Questions of Senior Administrators Using WEAVEonline Jeanne Butler,

Commission on Teacher Credentialing Ensuring Educator Excellence 1 Biennial Report October 2008.

{ Principal Leadership Evaluation. The VAL-ED Vision… The construction of valid, reliable, unbiased, accurate, and useful reporting of results Summative.

State and Regional Approaches to Improving Access to Services for Children and Youths with Epilepsy Technical Assistance Conference Call Sadie Silcott,

Campus Quality Survey 1998, 1999, & 2001 Comparison Office of Institutional Research & Planning July 5, 2001.

for quality and accountability

Educator Growth & Evaluation Marshall Public Schools.

Institutional Effectiveness Building on MUSC Excellence.

Periodic Program Review Guiding Programs in Today’s Assessment Climate LaMont Rouse Executive Director of Assessment, Accreditation & Compliance.

Florida Tech’s University Assessment Committee For A Continuing Culture of Assessment.

Standard Two: Understanding the Assessment System and its Relationship to the Conceptual Framework and the Other Standards Robert Lawrence, Ph.D., Director.

Program Framework Review November 2011 Pamela Miller, Ph.D. AVP for Learning.

Making Plans for the Future April 29, 2013 Brenda M. Tanner, Ed.D.

A Basic Guide to Academic Assessment Presented by Darby Kaikkonen Director of Institutional Research.

By Monica Y. Peters, Ph.D. Coordinator of Institutional Effectiveness/QEP Office of Quality Enhancement.

Western Carolina University Office of Assessment A Division of the Office of the Provost.

Assessment & Program Review President’s Retreat 2008 College of Micronesia - FSM May 13 – 15, 2008 FSM China Friendship Sports Center.

Assessment of Student Learning in General Education AAHE/NCA 2003 Assessment Workshop Omaha, Nebraska ● June 2003.

Assessment Committee 20 October Self Evaluation HAPS is the result of a process that began in 2012, the last Accreditation self- evaluation.

Program Review 2.0 Pilot 2 October Self Evaluation HAPS is the result of a process that began in 2012, the last Accreditation self- evaluation.

About District Accreditation Mrs. Sanchez & Mrs. Bethell Rickards Middle School

Program Review 2.0 Pilot 2 October Self Evaluation HAPS is the result of a process that began in 2012, the last Accreditation self- evaluation.

Institutional Effectiveness at CPCC DENISE H WELLS.

February, MansourahProf. Nadia Badrawi Implementation of National Academic Reference Standards Prof. Nadia Badrawi Senior Member and former chairperson.

Section 1 of the Universtal Standards Define and Measure Social Goals 1.

A Commitment to Continuous Improvement in Teaching and Learning Michaela Rome, Ph.D. NYU Assistant Vice Provost for Assessment.

Assessing the Operations at Your Institution: Purposes + Planning + Processes = Performance Arizona Assessment Conference Yavapai College, Prescott, Arizona.

Assessment Committee 20 October Self Evaluation HAPS is the result of a process that began in 2012, the last Accreditation self- evaluation.

HLC Criterion One Primer Criterion One. Mission August 27, 2015.

Kimberlee Pottberg.  Part 1: Why we use WEAVEonline  Part 2: How to enter components.

CBU CALIFORNIA BAPTIST UNIVERSITY Assessment, Accreditation, and Curriculum Office CBU - OIRPA.

Presented by Deborah Eldridge, CAEP Consultant

CALIFORNIA BAPTIST UNIVERSITY Office of Educational Effectiveness

Building Partnerships: How the Office of Assessment and Accreditation Can Help You and Your Program Be Successful.

Institutional Effectiveness Presented By Claudette H. Williams

Presentation transcript:

Understanding Institutional Effectiveness What it is What it isn’t Why it’s important

What is “institutional effectiveness?” Systematic, explicit and documented process of measuring performance against the mission in all aspects of an institution In essence: What did we say we were going to do? How do we know we’ve done it? How well did we do it? How are we going to do it better?

Identify goals and valid indicators of progress for each goal (aka metrics); identify thresholds of success (targets) for each metric Collect data and analyze outcomes Interpret outcomes; communicate outcomes; track outcomes over time where appropriate and identify where improvements are needed Implement changes/modifications that are expected to improve outcomes ClosingtheLoop The process of evaluating a unit’s effectiveness builds on MUSC Excellence

Who must evaluate their effectiveness? UniversityAcademic Programs Central Administrative units Student support units [Research][Community Service] (Integration grid) DMDVPAACAPSOAPRMUSC Gives Back PhD Biomed Sci Deans OfficesStudent Programs OTESLWellness Center Pharm DOAPRStudent Health BSNLibraryOEM MDFinance and Administration CAE Etc……Etc…

What institutional effectiveness isn’t (or shouldn’t be) Imbalanced as primarily a top-down or bottom up exercise  Top down: Standardized process and centralized documentation  Bottom up: Goal setting; assessment tools; target setting; determination of how to respond to results Unsustainable  Must be continuous, thus must be both useful and easy Emphasize success over improvement  Targets should be meaningful and ambitious—the ultimate purpose is to afford continuous quality improvement (not marketing)

Why it’s important 1. It is the basis of accountability and continuous quality improvement 2. Demonstrates sound stewardship of resources 3. Inspires students’ and other stakeholders’ trust and confidence 4. It is required for academic accreditation (both professional accreditation and institutional accreditation)

Integration grid (to show University Effectiveness)

Assessment Plan

Things that stay the same 1. Annual goal setting by units 2. Commitment to addressing the five Excellence Pillars 3. Annual institutional surveys  Employee Satisfaction Survey  Student Satisfaction Survey

Things that will change 1. Nomenclature  Old terms: Pillar goal=90% of COP employees agreed they are pleased to be working at MUSC  New terms: Employs greater specificity  Goal=Attract and retain high quality employees (formerly unwritten)  Metric (ideally, at least 2 per goal)=Rate of COP employees who agree they are pleased to be working at MUSC  Target=90%

Things that will change 2. Tracking and reporting of goals and results is required by SACS and must be centralized  OIE  TaskStream 3.Three-year cycle of trend tracking, then identification and documentation of results- driven modifications/changes expected to improve results Units may elect to report modifications annually, but are not “required” to do so

Office of Institutional Effectiveness Suzanne Thomas Regan Fantry Vince Moseley Bldg 41 Bee Street, 2 nd floor